Open Stack

On 09/20/2013 04:47 PM, Tim Smith wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Russell Bryant <rbryant at redhat.com
> <mailto:rbryant at redhat.com>> wrote:
>  
> 
>     I already put a session on the design summit schedule to discuss the
>     future of drivers.  I'm open to alternative approaches for driver
>     maintenance, including moving some of them (such as the vmware driver)
>     into another tree where the developers focused on it can merge their
>     code without waiting for nova-core review.
> 
>     http://summit.openstack.org/cfp/details/4
> 
> 
> That's quite an intriguing proposal.
> 
> What criteria would be used to determine which drivers stay in-tree vs.
> maintained as forks? E.g. libvirt driver in, everyone else out?
> Open-platform drivers (libvirt, xen) in, closed-platform drivers
> (vmware, hyperv) out? Drivers for platforms with large (possibly
> non-OpenStack) production deployments (libvirt, xen, vmware, hyperv) in,
> drivers without (e.g. docker), out?

I agree with Dan Smith's answer to this question.  There's no forcing
here.  It's just a matter of examining alternatives to the current setup
to see if the maintainers of each driver would prefer a different
arrangement.  If so, we should talk about it.  From some private
conversations, there seemed to be some potential interest.  If the end
result is we stay with what we have, that's perfectly fine for me.

> I'm sure that understanding the rational and philosophy behind such a
> proposal would help a lot of people make their decision w.r.t. PTL
> candidacies.

Please note that I'm not proposing anything specific here.  I'm just
putting forth a topic for discussion to gather feedback from driver
maintainers.  Even if I did have a specific thing to push for (I don't,
at least yet), I don't get my way if I'm in the PTL.  It's still very
much a consensus based community.

-- 
Russell Bryant